Author Topic: Musicological banter  (Read 328741 times)

killsaly

  • Guest
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #60 on: May 09, 2013, 12:08:00 pm »
http://trustmeimascientist.com/2013/05/06/reinventing-the-album-keeping-releases-relevant-in-the-21st-century/
This article is worth reading, if you are interested in the current state of music releases.

killsaly

  • Guest
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #61 on: May 09, 2013, 12:18:16 pm »
Also this wiki of Digital vs Analog format myths is worth a read.  I see way too much "vinyl is better" talk, with anything to back it up; except "it sounds better."

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Myths_%28Vinyl%29

sweetcell

  • Member
  • Posts: 15255
  • I don't belong here.
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #62 on: May 09, 2013, 01:06:22 pm »
Also this wiki of Digital vs Analog format myths is worth a read.  I see way too much "vinyl is better" talk, with anything to back it up; except "it sounds better."

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Myths_%28Vinyl%29

pure awesomeness.  neither side is right, both CDs and vinyl have their merits and detractions... but the self-delusion and self-importance that vinyl jukies speak with is beyond annoying.  it's insulting.
<sig>

Bent Reznor

  • Member
  • Posts: 4163
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #63 on: May 09, 2013, 01:09:37 pm »
The most annoying self-delusion comes from people who think that MP3 files sound good.

Justin Tonation

  • Member
  • Posts: 3062
  • Did you ever wonder?
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #64 on: May 09, 2013, 01:14:11 pm »
Also this wiki of Digital vs Analog format myths is worth a read.  I see way too much "vinyl is better" talk, with anything to back it up; except "it sounds better."

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Myths_%28Vinyl%29

pure awesomeness.  neither side is right, both CDs and vinyl have their merits and detractions... but the self-delusion and self-importance that vinyl jukies speak with is beyond annoying.  it's insulting.

It was never about sound. It was instead about differentiation. As indie mainstreamed, elitists had to find something to separate themselves from the hoi polloi. 
😐 🎶

K8teebug

  • Member
  • Posts: 3757
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #65 on: May 09, 2013, 01:15:23 pm »
Can anyone explain CHVRCHES?  I'm finding it pretty un-listenable too...

heinous.

Along with Haim.

sweetcell

  • Member
  • Posts: 15255
  • I don't belong here.
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #66 on: May 09, 2013, 01:48:31 pm »
The most annoying self-delusion comes from people who think that MP3 files sound good.

MP3 files *do* sound good when listening to music through disposable white earbuds - which is how most music is consumed these days.

i can't find it at the moment, but there is an awesome image that made the rounds a while ago who's message was: $3,000 guitar --> $5,000 microphone --> $8,000 preamp --> $50,000 signal chain --> $1.5M mixing desk --> 99 cent earphones.
<sig>

killsaly

  • Guest
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #67 on: May 09, 2013, 02:27:23 pm »
http://blog.iso50.com/31794/radiohead-on-a-wood-record/
There you go! Two things everyone loves, together! Records and Radiohead! Damn the sound!

hutch

  • Member
  • Posts: 16049
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #68 on: May 09, 2013, 03:23:57 pm »
The most annoying self-delusion comes from people who think that MP3 files sound good.

MP3 files *do* sound good when listening to music through disposable white earbuds - which is how most music is consumed these days.

i can't find it at the moment, but there is an awesome image that made the rounds a while ago who's message was: $3,000 guitar --> $5,000 microphone --> $8,000 preamp --> $50,000 signal chain --> $1.5M mixing desk --> 99 cent earphones.

MP3 files sounding good? What the mix is no longer brickwalled?  what kind of magic is this you speak of??? voodoo music?

I'm sorry but that is not possible... not only do MP3s of modern music tend to sound like crap but they make it so the records and cds for those of us that , you know, still buy albums also sound like crap

its disgusting.. the new phoenix is almost ruined due to brickwalling so people can think their "mp3s sound good" cause they blast out or something

cause you know its only music so why should how it sounds matter...

hutch

  • Member
  • Posts: 16049
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #69 on: May 09, 2013, 03:26:15 pm »
Also this wiki of Digital vs Analog format myths is worth a read.  I see way too much "vinyl is better" talk, with anything to back it up; except "it sounds better."



umm cause it fuckin' does sound better...

now modern vinyl mastered from shit mixes made for mp3s often does suck.

hutch

  • Member
  • Posts: 16049
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #70 on: May 09, 2013, 03:28:35 pm »
and if you think it sucks to hear how vinyl sounds better how much do you think it sucked for over a decade to hear people asking "ummm.. why  would you possibly buy records??"


I just couldn't get people to understand that records, you know, tended to sound better than CDs...forget about MP3s which are the biggest con yet... yeah bigger than getting everyone to throw away their records and buy CDs cause they "sounded better"...some of those early CD issues sound atrocious because they hardly spent a second on mastering them.. so eager was the industry to get the product to the racks so that the chumps would buy their 15.99$ reissues..

lucky for me i had some time to stock up on vinyl....

but , yeah, listen to vinyl like Miles Davis and tell me the CD sounds better.. no fuckin way.

no fuckin' way the cd sounds anywhere close to as good as the original six eye....
« Last Edit: May 09, 2013, 03:34:45 pm by hutch »

sweetcell

  • Member
  • Posts: 15255
  • I don't belong here.
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #71 on: May 09, 2013, 04:27:55 pm »
and if you think it sucks to hear how vinyl sounds better how much do you think it sucked for over a decade to hear people asking "ummm.. why  would you possibly buy records??"


I just couldn't get people to understand that records, you know, tended to sound better than CDs...forget about MP3s which are the biggest con yet... yeah bigger than getting everyone to throw away their records and buy CDs cause they "sounded better"...some of those early CD issues sound atrocious because they hardly spent a second on mastering them.. so eager was the industry to get the product to the racks so that the chumps would buy their 15.99$ reissues..

lucky for me i had some time to stock up on vinyl....

but , yeah, listen to vinyl like Miles Davis and tell me the CD sounds better.. no fuckin way.

no fuckin' way the cd sounds anywhere close to as good as the original six eye....

hutch, deal with it: vinyl has its pluses, and it has some serious minuses.  your assertion that "vinyl sounds better than CDs" is not a fact, it's an opinion.  vinyl has pops, hiss, wow & flutter... all distortions that are not found on the original master. 
<sig>

sweetcell

  • Member
  • Posts: 15255
  • I don't belong here.
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #72 on: May 09, 2013, 04:28:30 pm »
The most annoying self-delusion comes from people who think that MP3 files sound good.

MP3 files *do* sound good when listening to music through disposable white earbuds - which is how most music is consumed these days.

i can't find it at the moment, but there is an awesome image that made the rounds a while ago who's message was: $3,000 guitar --> $5,000 microphone --> $8,000 preamp --> $50,000 signal chain --> $1.5M mixing desk --> 99 cent earphones.

MP3 files sounding good? What the mix is no longer brickwalled?  what kind of magic is this you speak of??? voodoo music?

i take it your sarcasm meter is broken today ;D
<sig>

Justin Tonation

  • Member
  • Posts: 3062
  • Did you ever wonder?
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #73 on: May 09, 2013, 04:29:54 pm »
Vinyl sucked when CDs were introduced (unless you were buying audiophile pressings at twice the price). Between the warpage, off-centeredness, stitching, orange-peel, factory scratches, mangled sleeves, and other defects, you were more than lucky to get a good copy. Nowadays, vinyl is mostly pressed with tender loving care and on heavier discs. Colored vinyl is much more common now. But the capacity for present plants has pretty much been reached and QC is reportedly declining. Replacement parts for presses are getting hard to come by. The need for more capacity is obvious but the cost of investing in new machinery is enormous. While sales for vinyl have gone up for several years now, the rate of increase is plateauing. This means that investing in new capacity is even riskier.

When CDs were introduced cassettes were already outselling LPs nearly two to one (because of the Walkman) and the difference was expanding. So it was an obviously correct business decision to reduce LPs to make way for CDs.

Early CDs suffered from a dearth of engineers familiar with digital audio. Yet record companies quickly issued their catalogs on the format to take advantage of its exploding sales. This led to many releases suffering from bad sound because shoddy later generation masters were used and they were not properly mastered for the format. By the mid 90s there were many more engineers properly trained in digital audio and the technology had vastly improved. Many remasters sounded much better than their initial releases. But the loudness war was gearing up, as well as MP3/Napster and the vinyl revival.
😐 🎶

kosmo vinyl

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 10846
    • Hi-Fi Pop
Re: Musicological banter
« Reply #74 on: May 10, 2013, 07:58:31 am »
Can anyone explain CHVRCHES?  I'm finding it pretty un-listenable too...

heinous.

Along with Haim.

This whole "indie disco" movement is producing some un-listenable stuff..  And it's a far away from real disco as it can get.
T.Rex